Thinking in this way, we shall go on taking the Holy Name, and wherever there is some explanation being given about the devotional school, we shall try to avoid it. But that is not always best, because by hearing from the proper source, we get the kind of knowledge that gives us impetus to go on in our sadhana.
In Sri Chaitanya-charitamrta, Srila Krsnadas Kaviraja Goswami says, siddhanta baliya, we should discuss the siddhanta. Sanatana Goswami is the acharya of siddhanta. One may challenge, “What is the necessity of knowing siddhanta – what is what? I shall go on chanting the Name and wherever there is any class being given to explain Srimad Bhagavatam or Sri Chaitanya-charitamrta, I shall avoid it. That is knowledge - jnane prayasam udapasya – ‘One should totally abandon the unnecessary endeavour of gaining knowledge by discussing empirical philosophical Truths.” (SB 10.14.3)
But the jnana mentioned in this verse does not describe that sort of knowledge that gives us a real conception of what is the devotee, and what is God. That ‘knowledge’ appears similar to jnana externally, but if it is coming from a genuine source, it is another type – another substance.
The warning about jnana is given because anyone may give any kind of interpretation of the revealed scriptures. It is not that we should try to know anything and everything – whatever anyone will say we shall run there to learn something. But when there is any revelation coming through a real agent who is higher than us, we should be very earnest to hear. That will consolidate our position and help us to go on – to progress in our sadhana. We should not reject as ‘knowledge’ the following siddhanta: Who is Krsna and how is He svayam-bhagavan; who is Narayana; where are the 24 layers of misconception; where is Vaikunhta, Goloka; who is Baladeva; what are the different rasas.
If I say, “Oh, no – this is all jnana; dismiss it and take the Name.” That is foolishness. It should be considered as indolence or idleness. We should invite that knowledge which will enhance our faith more profoundly. One should welcome such discussions. The Lord Himself says:
mad citta mad-gata-prana, bodhayantah parasparamIn the association of sadhus, to discuss about Him from different standpoints is not ‘knowledge’ to be abandoned; rather, it should spontaneously and naturally be encouraged. It is called istha-gosthi: gosthi means ‘combination’ and istha means ‘desirable company’. In that association, we must talk about Him. That is a necessary part of devotion.
kathayantas ca mam, nityam, tusyante ca ramanti ca
“The thoughts of My pure devotees dwell in Me, their lives are fully devoted to My service, and they derive great satisfaction and bliss always enlightening one another and conversing about Me.”
And when bhava-bhakti awakens automatically these things will come:
ksantir avyartha-kalatvam viraktir mana-sunyata
asa-bandhah samutkantha nama-gane sada rucih
asaktis tad-gunakhyane pritis tad vasati-sthale
ityadayo ‘nubhavah syur jata-bhavankure jane
(Bhakti rasamrta sindhu 1.3.25/26)
“When the need of ecstatic emotion for Krsna fructifies in the heart of a devotee, the following symptoms naturally manifest in his behaviour: he feels forbearance; he doesn’t like to waste any time; he is detached from the mundane; he is free from pride; he lives in full hope; he is always eager to serve, he always has a taste for chanting the Lord’s Name; he loves to tell of the Divine qualities of the Lord; he love the Holy Abode of the Lord. These nine are called anubhava – subordinate signs of ecstatic love.”
If a sadhu spontaneously out of his own accord is expressing so many qualities of Krsna, and we go away, losing the benefit of that – it is suicidal. Rather, we need attachment for that – asaktih. “Oh, the good qualities of Krsna are being explained through this agent: I must try to give my ear to that.”
Otherwise, why has the ear been created? It has been created only to receive tidings of Him. The ear and the brain have been created for that purpose only and both must have their fulfilment in krsna-katha, hari-katha. What is the purpose of Gita? The Bhagavata? What is maya? What is svarupa-sakti? What is real knowledge and what is misconceived, apparent ‘knowledge’? All these things we must know to a certain extent because to avoid what is undesirable and to accept what is desirable presupposes some sort of knowledge at every step of our progress.
Jnane prayasam udapasya, to abandon fruitless knowledge-seeking does not mean that we must not talk about Krsna amongst ourselves or that when a sadhu is explaining about the Lord’s nama, rupa, gana, lila then we should flee from that place. It is not like that. By jnana – in the sense used here – is meant the teachings of sankhya of the following: atheist Kapila, schools of Patanjali yoga, Jaimini, the Buddhist school, etc. The advice to avoid them is also meant for the beginner but the preacher will have to come in contact with everything – to relegate them to their proper place.
And also sometimes jnana, knowledge which is necessary, can come from within. There is a stage of devotion when the necessary knowledge comes from within automatically. There is a stage of bhakti where things occur in this way – it is revelatory. Through revelation we can understand. It comes without any study, being supplied internally by caitya-guru. Sometimes knowledge of devotion may come to help us, but generally it will be by hearing from the lips of the devotees.
So the plane, the conception of Krsna in Vrndavan, is not lacking in cit, in knowledge. Cit means cetana, that is consciousness – “to know”. It is not in want of grandeur and awe such as is found in Vaikuntha. But when ananda takes precedence over cit, that it is advised, “Don’t endeavour much through knowledge.” There is sat-cit-ananda and by cit, by the faculty of knowing and understanding, we cannot achieve everything. But everything comes automatically to us by service. In service, there is also knowledge – a department of knowledge – and that develops automatically.